5 ms·

I asked farmers about this. They said it was stupid now that we have electricity. And even then, with the shorter days.. it was still stupid. (I'm quoting them)

protomyth 11y ago
I wish people would quit repeating the farmer myth. No farmer I have met wants daylight savings time. Look at Indiana for some perspective. Farm animals do not have watches.
- ctdonath 11y ago
  Farm animals do not have watches. As a parent: Neither do small children.
  - acacia314 11y ago
    Ugh, time changes with children...suck.
- hellbanner 11y ago
  Can we start a movement to end this nonsense?
- mikestew 11y ago
  Just because Indiana doesn't have DST now (for most of the state, anyway) doesn't mean they've always never had it. There was DST when I was growing up in the 70s, and they got rid of it long after agriculture was no longer the primary industry in Indiana. Having grown up in Indiana farm country, I'm of the opinion that "DST because farmers" has always been a myth. One gets up with the sun no matter the time. You quit work when it's dark. Oh, wait, that's not true, either. With the advent of electric lighting on vehicles about, oh, 100 years ago, lack of sun no longer need keep one from the fields. I recall many a late night that the farmer that owned the field next to us was out either tilling or harvesting, lights ablazin' on the front of the tractor or combine. So we've eliminated the farmer myth, why do we have DST? Few like it, do I...follow the money?
  - jcranmer 11y ago
    The main justification for DST is that it saves energy. The actual evidence of this claim is rather mixed, although even reports that show that DST saved energy aren't necessarily finding that the reduced costs make up for the mere cost of having to switch clocks twice a year (which itself isn't particularly well-quantified).
  - Jtsummers 11y ago
    The history of DST is distinct from agriculture, it was more strongly connected to factory work. It's easier to have every employee change their clock by an hour than change the schedule twice a year. However, we've moved away from the need (mostly) for the potential energy savings, though perhaps for the wrong reasons (we work in offices and factories with little natural light). The remaining reason to keep it is to allow people access to daylight after their normal work hours. But this can be accomplished by shifting schedules. Move the standard start of work from 7 to 6:30, split the difference. And if that seems intractable, shift our time zones by 30 minutes and be done with it.
  - pwg 11y ago
    > So we've eliminated the farmer myth, why do we have DST? One likely possibility is the "but that is the way it has always been done" response (http://www.jeffbridges.com/because.html http://www.jeffbridges.com/because.html).
cbd1984 11y ago
Also, the extra hour of daylight utterly destroys the crops.

protomyth 11y ago

I wish people would quit repeating the farmer myth. No farmer I have met wants daylight savings time. Look at Indiana for some perspective. Farm animals do not have watches.

ctdonath 11y ago
Farm animals do not have watches. As a parent: Neither do small children.
- acacia314 11y ago
  Ugh, time changes with children...suck.
hellbanner 11y ago
Can we start a movement to end this nonsense?
mikestew 11y ago
Just because Indiana doesn't have DST now (for most of the state, anyway) doesn't mean they've always never had it. There was DST when I was growing up in the 70s, and they got rid of it long after agriculture was no longer the primary industry in Indiana. Having grown up in Indiana farm country, I'm of the opinion that "DST because farmers" has always been a myth. One gets up with the sun no matter the time. You quit work when it's dark. Oh, wait, that's not true, either. With the advent of electric lighting on vehicles about, oh, 100 years ago, lack of sun no longer need keep one from the fields. I recall many a late night that the farmer that owned the field next to us was out either tilling or harvesting, lights ablazin' on the front of the tractor or combine. So we've eliminated the farmer myth, why do we have DST? Few like it, do I...follow the money?
- jcranmer 11y ago
  The main justification for DST is that it saves energy. The actual evidence of this claim is rather mixed, although even reports that show that DST saved energy aren't necessarily finding that the reduced costs make up for the mere cost of having to switch clocks twice a year (which itself isn't particularly well-quantified).
- Jtsummers 11y ago
  The history of DST is distinct from agriculture, it was more strongly connected to factory work. It's easier to have every employee change their clock by an hour than change the schedule twice a year. However, we've moved away from the need (mostly) for the potential energy savings, though perhaps for the wrong reasons (we work in offices and factories with little natural light). The remaining reason to keep it is to allow people access to daylight after their normal work hours. But this can be accomplished by shifting schedules. Move the standard start of work from 7 to 6:30, split the difference. And if that seems intractable, shift our time zones by 30 minutes and be done with it.
- pwg 11y ago
  > So we've eliminated the farmer myth, why do we have DST? One likely possibility is the "but that is the way it has always been done" response (http://www.jeffbridges.com/because.html http://www.jeffbridges.com/because.html).

cbd1984 11y ago

Also, the extra hour of daylight utterly destroys the crops.